Cult of Tarot Forum

Hi Dodalisque, What is your question?

Hi Charlie Brown. So here's my question:

My name is Jack. My mother sent me to market early this morning with the family cow so that we could sell it to buy food and pay our rent. Since my father died we have become very poor and the cow is the last of our possessions. But a few minutes ago, outside your fortune-telling tent, a very nice man offered to buy my cow, not for a few coins, but for some magic beans! He's waiting for me now near the beer tent. Should I accept his offer or should I do exactly what my mother told me to do?

Such a question would be more properly addressed through Lenormand, no?

In any case, before I do the reading I need to answer a question for myself:

Is Dodalisque speaking metaphorically or merely being puerile?



Well, that's a start. Right in the center of the line, we see a man faced with a choice.
The decision is one he's struggling with (7 of Wands) and, in response, he adopts the jejune, uncommitted posture of the Valet des Épées. So, whether you intended it or not, it seems that there is something afoot for you vis-à-vis these magic beans on offer.

At this point I am, of course, reminded an old French lyric:

Les Fèves, Les Fèves, bon pour la santé.
Le plus que tu mange, le plus que tu péter.
Le plus que tu pète, le plus tu te sens
donc mange tes fèves pour chaque repas.


Now, should you buy the beans or not? Here, the beans appear to be the superior option.

Click the photo in order to open it right-side up




To start, we see the proverbial wish card right at the top of the pyramid. And that wish could be yours. Here's the King of Cups offering all nine of them to you. You've come to a crossroads and need to decide.

Looking at the last three cards we see that each, in their way, imply growth and fertility. The cups rise, the flower grows, and the young boy finds his wealth amidst the dirt of the fields.

The hidden factor (1+ 5) is that you don't actually want magic beans, whatever those might mean to you, you want peace of mind.

Hi Charlie Brown. Many thanks for your reading. I'll give it a close study and get back to you as soon as I can. I'm not trying to be silly by sending you my question about Jack. I recently read an excellent book by James Ricklef called "Tarot Tells the Tale" where he uses tarot cards to examine incidents from stories or even from history to look into the forces playing on a particular character at a particular moment in time. My question is a restating of the fairy tale Jack and the Beanstalk. Yes, we know how the story turns out, so the idea of telling the future is not really relevant, but the character in the story and the fortune-teller he asks are unaware of their future. I think it's an interesting way of generating questions to pose the tarot. A bit of a change from the usual kinds of personal questions we get asked. Most people I read for don't really have a burning question about their own lives. They seem to find their own lives rather uneventful. But if you still think this approach is a bit frivolous then I apologise and hope to do better next time. It certainly wasn't my intention to be disrespectful. It will be interesting to see what your cards reveal about the psychological factors behind the fairy tale. And the story about the magic beans does contain the basic conflict behind many questions we get asked: do I do the sensible thing or follow my gut?

I generally couldn't give a whit about psychological factors. It's a big part of why I prefer to read Marseille. I was asked about a course of action and I answered such cleanly and clearly.

Charlie, Brown, no-one could accuse you of not being clean and clear. Having now had an opportunity to inwardly digest your reading, I want to thank you for a very poetic and persuasive journey through the cards. Even the initial three card reading addressing my motives and general personality resonated.
May I ask what deck you are reading with? Is it the Madenie? How beautiful that the Nine of Cups - the beans - should represent transcendence, situated at the top of the beanstalk pyramid. Jack's set up for life when he gets back down to earth - Page of Coins - what with the goose that lays the golden eggs and the singing harp - the lyre-shaped flowers - but he's still a child. He hasn't learned anything.
It's a strange story. Who sold him the beans? Some versions say a witch, some a sly merchant. There are elements of the story of Prometheus stealing fire from the gods, and perhaps of Orpheus and Eurydice, where in some versions Jack is protected in the giant's castle by the giant's daughter, with whom he falls in love. When Jack returns to earth and chops down the beanstalk, he leaves his love behind. He has wealth and entertainment, but his love, the flower in the centre of the four swords, or axes, is cut off from him.
The King of Cups I see more as the Giant, barring the way. You have to get past him to get to the magic beans. He is withholding the cup. Only Jack's belief in magic, as stupid as it seems to others, allows magic to happen. The belief in magic is a wish for transcendence. Or just wishful thinking perhaps.
I'm quite new to reading with the TdM. The pip cards continue to intimidate and confound me, but your reading was a big help. I generally read with just the Majors, three cards, though I have experimented with a 42 card deck - 22 Majors + 16 Courts + 4 Aces.

I really do get where asking questions like that could be a creative kind of exercise, but I think that if you want to do something like that you should start a reading circle exactly for that kind of activity.

Joan Marie wrote: ↑22 Jan 2019, 22:53 I really do get where asking questions like that could be a creative kind of exercise, but I think that if you want to do something like that you should start a reading circle exactly for that kind of activity.

I agree. It would be a nice exercise if explicitly organized.

dodalisque wrote: ↑22 Jan 2019, 22:35 May I ask what deck you are reading with? Is it the Madenie?

The Burdel. Although I really can't imagine why you would associate the King of Cups with the Giant when your question explicitly made reference to an old man sitting outside of a beer tent. How can there even be a giant when no beans have yet been bought, per the question, let alone planted?

Yes, thanks, I take your point. And Joan Marie, sometime I would love to contribute to a group that used the cards to look at such questions from literature or history but I already have too much on my plate at the moment. From a tarot point of view I can't see there is really much difference between these kinds of questions and matters of a personal nature, but maybe I'm wrong. I'm quite used to that sensation. Thanks again for your comments and I'm looking forward to next month's reading circle so I can try again.

I really can't imagine why you would associate the King of Cups with the Giant when your question explicitly made reference to an old man sitting outside of a beer tent. How can there even be a giant when no beans have yet been bought, per the question, let alone planted?
[/quote]

I guess that's the difference between literature questions and personal questions: in the story everything has already happened - past, present and future. The beans have been bought and planted and grown into a beanstalk which has already been chopped down, yet they are still in the merchant's sack in the beer tent, and the giant is a terrible obstacle AND already dead. The exercise only works though if both the reader and the questioner have read the same book or watched the same movie and are aware of the game being played. But the archetypal patterns of popular stories are constantly in operation in day-to-day life, so the motives of the characters still have relevance to us and seem fair game for a tarot reading. Characters in literature or history have moments of decision in their stories that seem just as relevant as problems facing us in our daily lives. Your reading gave me a lot to think about concerning my own attitudes to what I regard as magic. But I'll go away and think things through and maybe talk to Joan Marie about opening a different section in the forum for this kind of thing. Thanks again. Your reading has really inspired me to work more with the pip cards.

i can see where Dodalisque's intention could be mistaken - for mockery, say - and while he should have explained what he intended up front, i see nothing wrong with his question. there were no rules made about questions beforehand, and the spirit of his question was in good faith. if it were me, and i didn't already know about Rikleff, i would have asked Dodalisque for some clarity. as it was, the reading actually went quite well.
one of the things Rikleff's method does is test the tarot's efficacy, as well as hone one's interpretation of the cards. psychology doesn't have to come into it or anything if you don't wish it to. the frequency with which Rikleff's method works is worth noting. it isn't simply the vantage of hindsight, either, which makes it work; but sometimes that helps one read the cards, and opens up new ways to interpret the cards. i don't see anything wrong with it. conversely, one could ask a commonplace question such as "is she right for me?" and already know the answer and/or not really care about the answer.

chiscotheque wrote: ↑24 Jan 2019, 03:34 i see nothing wrong with his question. there were no rules made about questions beforehand

Where is there a statement to the contrary? A question was asked, a question was answered.

chiscotheque wrote: ↑24 Jan 2019, 03:34the spirit of his question was in good faith.

The longer this goes on, the more I doubt that. A question was asked, a question was answered. Feedback was given and everything seemed to be finished. Why is it still being discussed if it was nothing but a simple, good faith question that no one actually said wasn't a simple, good faith question? Now, I presume that you are not speaking for him and I have no idea what you do or don't know, outside of this thread, about his intentions. Your words, however, seem to painting a picture in which my reading (and, of course the skill and labor that went into it) was a "test" of some random author's method that was administered with neither explanation nor my consent. To the extent that I was being treated as a guinea pig for some third party's idea, I think that's shitty and manipulative, and I resent it.

Where is there a statement to the contrary?

forgive me if i have myself misread the situation. starting with your question

Is Dodalisque speaking metaphorically or merely being puerile?

i interpreted your response as prickly, not giving a whit etc.
and then Joan Marie's involvement seemed an attempt to moderate.
but as we none of us know each other and this is a rather 1-dimensional medium, misinterpretations are easily made.
i should qualify that by saying i do know Dodalisque, and so was to some degree privy to his perception of events. on that i'll say no more, as it's not my place to say.
that said, when you go on to conclude

To the extent that I was being treated as a guinea pig for some third party's idea, I think that's shitty and manipulative, and I resent it.

it appears to corroborate what could be read as a mistrustful and defensive stance. further

a "test" of some random author's method that was administered with neither explanation nor my consent.

takes one word i used ("test") out of context and indulges in its own bit of painting.
if nothing else, you seem to be contravening the above stated "Forum rules" to

Have Fun!

chiscotheque wrote: ↑24 Jan 2019, 05:22 that said, when you go on to conclude

To the extent that I was being treated as a guinea pig for some third party's idea, I think that's shitty and manipulative, and I resent it.

it appears to corroborate what could be read as a mistrustful and defensive stance.

I was referring to your words, not his. I am mistrustful of why you feel the need to enter into this. If Dodalisque feels aggrieved in some way, then I'd prefer to hear it from him. I'm also confused as to how you think anything I've done or said here is defensive but, honestly, I'm not at all interested in what have to say on the matter, so please don't share it.

chiscotheque wrote: ↑24 Jan 2019, 05:22further

a "test" of some random author's method that was administered with neither explanation nor my consent.

takes one word i used ("test") out of context and indulges in its own bit of painting.

The context is that you said the purpose of the method was to test accuracy. By inserting me into this method is it not, then, an explicit test of my accuracy? Again, he asked a question, I answered the question. He and I discussed it afterwards. And now here you are for some reason.

chiscotheque wrote: ↑24 Jan 2019, 05:22if nothing else, you seem to be contravening the above stated "Forum rules" to

Have Fun!

Thank you, but I have other plans.

oh, i know whose words you were referring to, but i didn't feel the need so much as chose to "enter into this", as it appears on an otherwise open forum. testing the tarot is one of the things i said the method does - not the only thing nor testing you in particular, Charlie Brown. again, one of the reasons i'm here is it's an open forum; i happen to've read the intercourse and was not speaking for Dodalisque or even for Rikleff's example, necessarily, but being familiar with Rikleff's method i felt like extrapolating on it a bit, that's all. in future, i'll keep in mind your other plans.

fair enough.

dodalisque wrote: ↑23 Jan 2019, 21:15 I guess that's the difference between literature questions and personal questions..

That's a really good argument right there for making literature questions a separate exercise, that they are inherently different.

I think it's safe to assume that unless otherwise stated or agreed upon, querents are expected to pose questions relating to their personal lives, which the responses to can be viewed and considered in the context of real events.

I know this discussion got a little testy, but really, so what? Isn't that half the fun of an open forum? I think everybody got what they wanted to say, out, and we've all learned something.

Onward!

Right on! We're all just here to have fun. What a thankless task you have, Joan Marie. I sincerely hope you're getting something out of it. So wonderful to have a place to talk tarot.